I think we did the right thing
 

Saddam was today's equivalent of Hilter, but his cruelty was allowed to run longer. We should have done it sooner. I believe this was the right thing to do. And that history will see it as such. The question is - How long will it take for the Iraqi Populace to know that we are not there to dominate, but merely to allow the election of a popular Democratic government?

PP/OT posts forum, the only place to be. :)

Problem is, now it looks as though they might want to elect a religious, (Islamic), government, ala Iran or Afganistan before 2002. How do we tell them what kind of govt. they can elect?

I had a feeling this would happen, in otherwords, what if they democratically elect an anti-U.S. govt.? This is a very real possibility. :(

....what if they...elect an anti- U.S. govt.?
 

Ironic, ain't it? My understanding of one of the reasons the U.S. invaded (excuse me, liberated) Iraq was so the citizens would be free to do that.

Iraq citizens are already enjoying their new liberties, by publicly protesting the U.S. military presence. Couldn't have done that two months ago without losing a couple body parts, minimum.

Ed

at least now iraqian street vendors can sell beer and/or liquor openly. there must be a few muslims that likes that freedom.

GW would go down as the biggest buffoon in history if they allowed free elections and the people voted in a fundamentalist Islamic government a-la Iran 1980. It's not going to happen (even if it does.) We need a secular government that will force the Sheiites and Kurds into submission, and work in coordination with our security infrastructure, purchase weapons from us, and play ball regarding oil production. If they don't like it, screw em, right? I mean really, nobody gives a damn about the Iraqis, least of all the chickenhawks who called for this war in the first place.

The way I see it, there are various groups trying to get a political foot in the door by proclaiming "____ is what the Iraqi people really want."

Doug, the "chickens" in all this were the ones whom clamored to do nothing, just continue to let the average of 4000/year Iraqi children die due to malnutrition, JUST so they could fly in the face of Bush.

These chickens choose to "stand up" to Bush, rather than standing up to Saddam. If Bush is the dunce these chickens make him out to be . . .well, these chickens do indeed deserve that lable.

Perhaps if the people of Iraq were educated better they would understand our presence and not elect another Islamic fundamentalist government.

Re: I think we did the right thing
 

The US is already trying to install a puppet government in Iraq - only Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles didn't see this coming. The locals are already unhappy with us being there, and it's going to be very easy for other US-unfriendly factors to work the anti-American angles and make it worse. Job #1 for GW & Co is to divvy up the spoils of war, get some contracts inked, and get the cash flowing in.

Meanwhile, the administration is looking to Syria as the next target...

Thom, why do you say 'The US is already trying to install a puppet government in Iraq' (?) . . .are you just trying to find another reason to slam GW?

You know, if you said the US was trying to force in a democratic government I would believe it. Claiming a puppet government is a bit much. Puppet governments are far too much hassle. Furthermore, the US doesn't need a puppet when they have the 'Big Stick' of a hugely powerful military force, and the carrot of success.

Though, saying " only Stevie Wonder and Ray Charles didn't see this (puppet govt) coming." *is* a cute way of trying to duncify GW & Co.

BTW, Venezuela will be the next target. Hugo Chavez is another a'hole with the $'s to finance his bad actions.
Syria has (w/o a puppet govt) has been accomodating some US needs and request.

looking back a year, you did great!

How quickly the Iraqi people forget what brutal regime was just ousted from their country. BTW: those Iraqi prisoners that are unfortuntely being tortured by our troops were part of this brutal regime. While I do not condone what our troops did to these prisoners, they are, in a sense, getting a taste of their own medicine.

I would really like to hear the opinion of the father or brother or mother of an Iraqi who was beaten and killed by Saddam's forces. I wonder if they share the same sentiment that most US folk do about what the troops did to the prisoners. . . Remember, the prisoners NOW were the ones doing the beatings and killings before.

Just a different perspective,
-Zoltan.

As always, in Iraq, our impressions are fueled by the actions of a few....just as all profewsional atheletes do not use steroids and have mistresses, all San Franciscans are not gay, and all guys that drive Carreras do not have a midlife crisis and penile dysfunction. Most Iraqis are glad we have freed them and do not support the current terrorists (or insurgents, freedom fighters, or modern minutemen as the liberals call them). Most are just afraid to confront crazy people with weapons..certainly a reasonable fear. Some have overcome that fear and are fighting back. A lot of the Al-Sadr militia seem to be getting assasinated by locals these days and the tens of thousands of citizens are protesting Al-Sadr and attempting to force him to leave Najaf. Our troops just walked into Najaf virtually unopposed and are now patrolling in F'ckinalluga. Too bad the media chooses to concentrate on the bad news.
Personally, I don't think we really care if a religious leaders are elected in Iraq as long as they follow their constitution and guarantee that folks of other faiths are allowed to practice religion as they choose. Many of our own leaders are religious. Religion is not the problem (even Islam). The problem is the kooks of any religion that use religion to justify their unjustifiable actions.

Interesting. I like the tone of the original post here. Not particularly political. I like the idea of removing genocidal dictators as much as the next guy, but this thread should elevate concerns about what our presence is now for, perception, etc. For example, the original post asks if the Iraquis understand that we are there for the benevolent purpose of installing a democratic government. Do you guys see the obvious here? In our egocentrism, we cannot understand or accept the possibility that this goal (democratic government) may in itself be something that is not desired by that culture. And if any of you guys chime in here with anything like "well, they SHOULD like it, so we'll just continue until they do," I and probably several others are likely to come down hard. Even if nobody says that, can everyone not see why the world thinks our foreign policy is that of Imperialism?

Saddam was a bad guy and it's good he's gone. Perhaps more good has been created here than bad. But it seems clear we have made a mess that will be difficult to clean up, and in the best of outcomes I think we can count on being regarded as imperialist bullies in that part of the world.

Again, Saddam was a bad man and his fall from power is a good outcome. But I personally feel that the other outcome is that GW has fueled terrorism. Glenn, "dolt" is the kindest label I can place on GW. I like to think that's what he is. That's assuming his actions are intended to serve our country.

Can you provide news sources for this? I've been reading all my usual media sources and see that the militants are actively fighting back in Najaf, although they can't match US forces. In Fallujah my understanding was that the patrolling is currently being done by the Iraqi "1st Battalion" or "Fallujah Brigade" (not sure what its called now), not by US troops. If there are better news sources on the web, please post the URLs as I'd like to be reading them. Thanks.

Super: this thread was lifted by me. It's about a year old.

About topic:
This war has been justified by few reasons. First was fighting the terrorism. Now (and actually, then too) it's obvious that supposedly "friendly nations" as Saudi Arabia are helping terrorists in much greater degree than Iraq ever did. When that failed it was "to find WMD". No WMD was found. The last resort was "to bring freedom to Iraqi people". That people seems not to enjoy that "freedom" so much and are on their way to gather behind dubious religious leaders that seem to be as brutal as Saddam and religious fanatics to boot.

You hit the nail on the head when you said that main problem was unability of great deal of american people to understand that there are another mentalities and that you cannot enforce your culture on someone by waging war.

What i'm trying to say is that they might and probably will choose wrong even if they are free to choose. It has happened many times before. Look at ex Yugoslavia, Ukraine etc.

I believe some things cannot be learned overnight. Many americans don't have a clue about middle-east mentality and culture and have naïve belief that it's just a matter of taking away "evil dictator" and people will immediately go out in streets, throw flowers at "liberators" and go straight into voting boots to chose a nice-mannered democrat.

This maybe happened in Europe during WWII but one shouldn't forget that european population and culture isn't (wasn't?) so far from American. This is completly new ballgame, religion etc.

Going into war with Iraq for dubious reasons mentioned (even if we for once accept them, which is on a rim of reason) without doing some research into things I pointed out is stupid at it's best.

What I really really wonder is why GWB went to Iraq in the first place? To divert attention from internal affairs (his failing economical policy?) Or was it to ensure access to oil-fields? Was it beacuse Saddam tried to kill his father? Was it a mix of those reasons with a touch of possibilities for monetary win for his advisors?

Anyway you turn it, it's a bloddy disaster and whole world was telling you so before everything started.

Worst of all was the arrogance of US of A when (almost all) other countries refused to get into this mess. "You are with or against us" etc. It's a major case of hybris that is likely to cost US many years after it.

Careful there, Jim; that's may be read as a boarderline compliment to GW Bushes decisive leadership. :eek:

Oh wait. . . I see that you have kindly:rolleyes: labeled him a "Dolt" because now we (the US) will be "regarded as imperialist bullies in that part of the world."


Hmmm. .. when GW came into office the US was regarded as imperialist cruise-missle lobbing dummies, in that part of the world. . . .We where seen as the dunkin-dounut cops of the world. . .Too afraid to take-on the gang members, when the easy money is in pulling over the business-man in the Porshe. . . the appearance of doing something, inbetween dounut-fests.

The world thugs are behaving a bit better now, I would say.
So, yeah, danm-straight, skippy. .. Perhaps more good has been created here than bad.

beeper, you make a good point about the culture in the Iraq not being ready for our culture.

However, what you are missing is, that left alone, Iraq would be left 'in the dark' culturally speaking, had Saddam not been overthrown.

Satellite Dishes-- Just as the far reaches of Sweden have been forever changed, so has Iraq. Satellite Dishe demand in Iraq went CRAZY in Iraq after Saddam was deposed.

So, what we have now, in Iraq, are children with a view of hope contrasted heavly against the view of insurgents stirring-up bad times.

I don't think they asked for it either.

That's your own personal opinion. What makes you think that they are "enlightened" now regarding the fact that they are on their way to get themselves hard-core religious leadership. Remember, Iran was fairly secularized country before it's shah was owerthrown (for over-extravagant living) and religious ayatollahs came to power pulling whole country into dark-ages.

Err...far reaches of Sweden were mostly changed by bulldozer, trains and lot's of hard work. Actually, they aren't changed that much at all ;)

So you support your theory of rapid emancipation of Iraqi people by raised demand for Satelite dishes?

You cannot evade the fact that this war wasn't started to bring MTV to Iraqi children but to find WMD and ferret out the terrorists. There is no WMD and there are no terrorists. It's a fact. There are 800+ dead americans and heaps of pissed off Iraqis wanting you out of their country...

"Bringing MTV to people if Iraq" is latest in string of failed justificatins of this extremly bad move.

Note that this thread itself is pulled out for "hate to say I told you so"-reasons.

I'm unfortunately inclined to believe that "bringing MTV to Iraqi people" reserve-reason nr.3 will deflate in a while (a year at max) and I really really wonder what you are going to say then?

Historically, many closed tyrann-ruled or oppressive countrys have imploded by themselves when left alone of pure economical reasons. Look at Albania, Romania and even Vietnam.

I'm quite sure Iraq would succumb too after a while. Instead of letting them come to that conclusion themselves , GWB now has a bunch of Iraqis homogenized by their hate of USA. And judging from TV-rapports, it's not only insurgents that hate USA...

Whatever the reasons were for invading (and I would actually respect GWB more if there really were some shady winning-scheme rasons instead of this "bring them democracy crapola") it failed big time and everyone told you so.

While I dont condone what happened in the Iraqi prisons, It seems to me that the ones complaining the most are the people in this country, and not the Iraqi people! I quess they want these militants to suffer some of the same abuses as they did.
As usual , the left wing media only shows the bad we do, and not the good things that we have done over there.

I'm not seeing it . .and I'm a fairly self-critical person.

What I do see is your distorted perspective on just how things are in Iraq. It seems you've been watching a bit too much Algazera network on your Satellite Dish. ;)